Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 2241 - 2250 of 4837 for WA 0859 3970 0884 Jasa Borongan Kanopi Besi Double Terpercaya Kraton Yogyakarta.
Search results 2241 - 2250 of 4837 for WA 0859 3970 0884 Jasa Borongan Kanopi Besi Double Terpercaya Kraton Yogyakarta.
State v. Martin D. Triplett
the officer decided to “double check” his patdown of the subject by pulling the person’s shirt back so he
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=20168 - 2005-12-20
the officer decided to “double check” his patdown of the subject by pulling the person’s shirt back so he
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=20168 - 2005-12-20
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
for the court to do so. ¶21 Finally, Greenbriar claims that the court improperly awarded Advantage double
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=101415 - 2017-09-21
for the court to do so. ¶21 Finally, Greenbriar claims that the court improperly awarded Advantage double
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=101415 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
State v. Martin D. Triplett
the officer decided to “double check” his patdown of the subject by pulling the person’s shirt back so he
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=20168 - 2017-09-21
the officer decided to “double check” his patdown of the subject by pulling the person’s shirt back so he
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=20168 - 2017-09-21
COURT OF APPEALS
the duplicate tickets were improperly double counted as to multiple victims. That is, he suggests that in each
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=97780 - 2013-06-03
the duplicate tickets were improperly double counted as to multiple victims. That is, he suggests that in each
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=97780 - 2013-06-03
State v. Anthony Liggins
are multiplicitous, in violation of double jeopardy; and (3) the State did not have to prove any different elements
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=2223 - 2005-03-31
are multiplicitous, in violation of double jeopardy; and (3) the State did not have to prove any different elements
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=2223 - 2005-03-31
COURT OF APPEALS
a double jeopardy bar requires vacating one of two parallel counts, resentencing for a remaining count
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=48912 - 2010-04-12
a double jeopardy bar requires vacating one of two parallel counts, resentencing for a remaining count
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=48912 - 2010-04-12
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
double the normal legal limit of .08. See WIS. STAT. § 340.01(46m)(a); WIS. STAT. § 346.63(1)(b
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=717185 - 2023-10-19
double the normal legal limit of .08. See WIS. STAT. § 340.01(46m)(a); WIS. STAT. § 346.63(1)(b
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=717185 - 2023-10-19
[PDF]
State v. Conrad Hagenkord
argument fails. To the extent that he raises additional constitutional claims of ex post facto, double
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=12256 - 2017-09-21
argument fails. To the extent that he raises additional constitutional claims of ex post facto, double
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=12256 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
Cir. 2010). We are not persuaded. ¶6 The Bell court held that “[i]mpermissible double counting
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=186359 - 2017-09-21
Cir. 2010). We are not persuaded. ¶6 The Bell court held that “[i]mpermissible double counting
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=186359 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
basis because the duplicate tickets were improperly double counted as to multiple victims
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=97780 - 2014-09-15
basis because the duplicate tickets were improperly double counted as to multiple victims
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=97780 - 2014-09-15